You are here

India destroys pirate boat

Uh, first world white countries are a "club" snert, and yes they can be lumped together

Riiiiight. Of course. Everyone with a noticeable lack of melanin is responsible for the actions of two Italian companies, so it's only fair that we all (as well as Korea, Hong Kong, Japan, Thailand, Nigeria and too many other countries to type out) should be held responsible by these thugs.

"go pirates go".

Quote:

Desperate people do desperate things, no?

Interesting that the pirates are splitting the take with the local warlords. Those warlords must be really, really hungry to need half, eh? I'm sure they're spending it only on food, of course, but what if they were spending it on, oh, I don't know, let's just say "weapons" or something? Would that put a different spin on this "subsistence piracy"?

Uh, first world white countries are a "club" snert, and yes they can be lumped together..

However, would you include Yemen, China and Egypt in that category? Pirates are holding their ships and citizens hostage and the Yemeni coast guard has reacted with force. I think the point is that a "we" and "they" summary of this situation is extremely simplistic and ignores the position of many non-white and non-first world countries. Not least of which is Kenya, which is having to legally deal with a lot of the fall out.

If you want to pretend to yourself that Yemen, China and Egypt have been driving the world consumer economy for the last 200 years, and that waste by-products of the entire industrial process end-to-end are the result of servicing their lavish lifestyles, be my guest. These jurisdictional boundaries are regularly used to subvert all kinds of legislation that interferes with profitable conduct of trade, and yes, countries that have been impoverished by the imperial and colonial footprint, are often the most likely to have lax regulations precisely so that they can have some kind of economy at all.

The country of Liberia practically exists solely to provide a flag of convenience designed to subvert all kinds of regulations imposed by many countries on the conduct of the shipping industry, precisely so that you can avoid direct responsibility for actions taken to service "our" needs.

Well Cueball - who is bankrolling the US right now and preventing them from total bankruptcy with their 11 trillion $ debt?

I agree with you about history, but at the present time the Chinese are rapidly increasing carbon emissions. If their emissions aren't reduced it won't matter how much we reduce ours.

And yes some just use a flag of convenience, but the article specifically refers to citizens of those countries and the armed reaction by those countries. I am not saying they are to blame for this or why it started. I am just saying that American and Canadian and French ships could stop going anywhere near the Gulf of Aden and crack down on flags of convenience adn there would still be piracy and countries having to deal with this somehow. You could remove all white people and all white interests and there would still be an issue, so I disagree with the characterization of this being just a rich white club thing.

I could argue all day about how spousal abuse is a complex problem and not one solely that is the domain of men. I could say such an assertion was sweeping statement and in that sense prejudicial. I could point to numerous examples where women have abused their male domestic partners. I could possibly make a case that while historically it is true that men have been the primary perpetrators of violent abuse, but also that regulation, custom and social awareness are changing that. I could make these points a central part of my discussion on the topic of spousal abuse, when faced with someone who is asserting that it is men who are primarily abusers, and women primarily the victims.

What would I be doing, if I were to do that?

Why I think some people would accuse me of trying to deflect the conversation away from the issue of my male privilege.

Interesting that the pirates are splitting the take with the local warlords. Those warlords must be really, really hungry to need half, eh? I'm sure they're spending it only on food, of course, but what if they were spending it on, oh, I don't know, let's just say "weapons" or something? Would that put a different spin on this "subsistence piracy"?

Isn't the entire country in a state of anarchy with the warlords as the only governing authorities? In the absence of a central authority and total chaos, with only the warlords trying to maintain any kiond of order, do the pirates have any choice? I don't know, I'm guessing. It sounds like the country is on the verge of collapse if it hasn't already.